First of all, it is necessary to find out what the code of ethics is, as well as its main functions. In general, a code of ethics refers to behavior standards that all employees in the organization should follow (Stacks et al. 11). It concerns the interpersonal communication within the firm, regulates the jointed activities of the staff members, and helps maintain a productive atmosphere in the team. Thus, the primary objective of the code of ethics is to formulate a positive perception of the organization while improving the quality of working conditions. Consequently, the code of ethics helps administrators establish healthy behavior rules regarding both employees and clients of the firm (Stacks et al. 21). This approach makes it easier to manage team relationships and improve overall productivity. Ultimately, employees generally work more efficiently when they adhere to uniform standards of behavior.
The most important point of the code of ethics, I think, is that it is designed to respect the interests of all aspects of professional activity. The restrictions and rules established by the code serve to reduce the number of conflicts and excesses of authority (Stacks et al. 89). This leads to the creation and maintenance of a more creative and optimistic atmosphere in the team, which simplifies the work. Thus, it is the concern for specialists that is the key feature of the code of ethics for me.
As already mentioned above, the need for a code is due to a fair restriction of the rights and behavior of specialists. This approach allows setting regulated boundaries among the team members and in the communication with customers. A lack of rules might lead to unethical behavior and socialization problems, which would further deteriorate the organization’s productivity and hinder the relationships with customers. The rules are necessary to restrict some of the employees’ initiatives which would potentially damage the company. However, it is essential to create an appropriate code of ethics and consider the inner desires and potential of the employees (Stacks et al. 69). Any regulations that restrict the personal freedoms of the team members or humiliate them in any way would make it more challenging to make people follow the code of ethics. Ultimately, it is essential to consider both the moral standards and the inner desires of the employees to compose an effective code of ethics that would regulate the undesired behavior patterns.
The code of ethics as a phenomenon is most clearly explained using the theory of utilitarianism. According to this approach, any moral and ethical act is measured by its value. Such a view of human activity is most effective in the context of labor relations (Stacks et al. 101). Since the main task of any labor is the product or result, it makes sense to introduce the category of utility. Therefore, in order to increase the overall efficiency of the work of specialists and companies, a code of ethics is provided, which separates and prohibits everything that reduces the quality of activity (Stacks et al. 37). In addition, the code itself contains provisions that share the principles of utilitarianism. For example, personal worldviews and prejudices harm professional activities and are therefore not important in the context of work. This provision is both enshrined in the code and is one of the principles of utilitarianism.
It is important to emphasize that the code of ethics has legal force, and accordingly, there are sanctions for its violation. As a rule, such measures are disciplinary in nature, in the form of a fine or dismissal (Stacks et al. 56). The severity of the sanctions depends on the degree of the violation, but no disregard for ethical standards can be interpreted as a crime. Disciplinary sanctions are part of labor and civil law, and, accordingly, ethical standards are closely intertwined with legislation.
In the professional environment, unforeseen situations occur when a choice arises between ethical principles and necessary actions. In this case, the theory of utilitarianism resolves the issue, which recommends evaluating the intended action by utility (Stacks et al. 54). Accordingly, the specialist should do what is most effective at the moment. For example, a psychologist learns that his client is a killer, and the professional is faced with the choice of keeping the secret or reporting to the police. In this case, I would choose the second option since such an act can be interpreted as more useful. This is explained by the fact that in this way, I will save society from a dangerous element and save the client from his mental suffering regarding the crime he has committed. If the first option is chosen, the effectiveness of such a solution decreases since the final result of the treatment is unknown, and the dangerous element remains relevant to society.
In the event that there are contradictions in the code of ethics, it is necessary to act as follows. First, it is worth turning to statistics, that is, data on how often people act in a particular situation in one way or another. This is a scientific approach that determines the effectiveness of the selected norms (Stacks et al. 51). In a more complex situation, one should turn to the code as a tool for analyzing what behavior is more often approved by a given document.
Work Cited
Stacks, Don W., Eichhorn, K. C. and Salwen, Michael B. (Eds.). An integrated approach to communication theory and research. Taylor & Francis, 2019.